Jonathan and His Continent Part 24

"Three negroes made their appearance at the house of a lady much respected in the neighbourhood, and asked most obsequiously for a drink.

Finding that she was alone with her daughter, the three scoundrels 'burked' the poor women and outraged them.

"As soon as the crime became known, several inhabitants of Pemberton armed themselves, and set out in search of the criminals. After searching several hours in the neighbouring woods, the avenging band came across two suspicious-looking negroes in hiding. They were seized upon at once, led to a tree, and hanged to it. Then, with a view to extracting from them a confession of guilt, the avengers unhanged them.

After having protested their innocence for some time, the two negroes at last confessed themselves guilty.

"This carried the indignation of the Pemberton Ferry people to a state of paroxysm. In less time than it takes to describe it, a pile of pine logs and dry branches was made at the foot of the tree and set fire to, and the two negroes were again hung, this time over the flames.

"The sight of these wretches, being lynched with such refinement of torture, was horrible to behold. Soon the executioners themselves, in spite of their rage and fury, could no longer bear the sight, and, taking pity on their victims, shot them to put an end to their sufferings. The two corpses were left hanging to the tree, to serve as warning."

The paper adds:

"The third negro has not yet been discovered; but, if he is caught, he will probably be lynched also."

Here, then, we have two wretched creatures, first hung, then unhung, and invited to confess. They are not confronted with their victims, who, however, could not have been at a great distance. They are rehung, burnt over a slow fire, and at last shot. This is pure savagedom.

When the operation of lynching is practised spontaneously, under the influence of excitement caused by the atrocity of such a crime as that committed by the three negroes, and without any refinement of torture, it is, of course, comprehensible in a young society, though not excusable. But that poor wretches, accused of some crime, and whose innocence or culpability must soon be p.r.o.nounced by a jury, should be dragged from prison by the populace, and executed with perfect impunity,--this is something which surpa.s.ses comprehension, even in a country where one is apt to be surprised at nothing.

And this is not all.

Lynch law has its humours, as the Westerners express it in the cynical language which is so natural to them: it is when there has been a mistake made--in the victim, and the whole thing has to be gone over again, because the wrong man has been lynched.

Again I leave an American newspaper, the _Chicago Herald_, to speak:

"The little town of St. Helens is in a ferment. A party of lynchers entered it this morning, and went straight to the house of Mrs. Williams to apprise her that her husband had been lynched by mistake during the night. After having expressed their regrets, the men left to go in search of the real culprit. We do not attempt to describe the anguish of the poor woman. It is feared she will lose her reason."

This took place in the year of disgrace 1888.

Lynch law has often had salutary results.

In the days of the "Gold fever," in California, San Francisco was overrun by scoundrelism of the most virulent type. Twice was the infant city reduced to ashes by incendiary hands. Then the leading citizens rose in their wrath, banded themselves together in the name of a Vigilance Committee, and soon, from every available lamp-post, dangled the body of a ruffian. By such treatment was the city purged of crime.

A few years since an Irish agitator named Kearney preached the gospel of dynamite and the spoliation of the rich, on an open s.p.a.ce, known as Sand Lots. As vast crowds a.s.sembled to listen to this incendiary doctrine, a new Vigilance Committee was formed, comprising all the leading bankers, merchants, and professional men. A polite note was sent to Mr. Kearney that if he ventured to speak again on the Sand Lots, he would be most accurately strung up there and then. Whereupon the Irish gentleman disappeared into s.p.a.ce, and his present address is unknown.

CHAPTER XXVII.

_A Word on Marriage and Divorce.--Scenes for an Opera-Bouffe.--An Amateur Dentist._

As I have said elsewhere, each State of the Union makes its own laws.

The result is, that a thing which is legal in one State is not necessarily legal in the others.

The most curious, and those which differ most, are the laws upon marriage and divorce.

If it is easy to get married in the United States, it is still more easy to get unmarried.

In the State of New York, for instance, if you go to a hotel with a woman, and inscribe _Mr. and Mrs. so and so_ on the register, the Law looks upon you as legally married to that woman, but the marriage is not recognised as valid in some other States. To obtain a divorce in the State of New York, you must prove infidelity on the part of your wife; but just across the Hudson, in the State of New Jersey, it is to be obtained on a proof of cruelty or incompatibility of character. If this is not easy enough for you, take the train to Chicago, where divorce is to be had for the asking almost.

The Court of Divorce in Chicago, called by the Americans the "divorce mill," decided 681 cases during the year 1887.

This inst.i.tution is just as flouris.h.i.+ng in the State of Indiana as in Illinois. The Easterners jokingly pretend that, as the train rolls into the capital of Indiana, the porters cry out: "Indianopolis--twenty minutes for divorce!" so that couples who may have fallen out on the journey can part company for good.

Does the husband snore, or chew; has he disagreeable breath, or a clumsy manner of kissing his wife? does that lady wear false hair, give her tongue too free play, or habitually take up the newspaper as soon as her husband shows signs of dropping into sentiment? all these offences are serious ones before the aforesaid tribunals.

Without troubling to go and settle in Utah, an American may set up a seraglio of legitimate wives. Each lawful spouse might be a concubine outside the State she was married in; but by carefully studying the laws of the different States, Jonathan could, if he pleased, indulge in polygamy without fear of being prosecuted for it.

I have read in American papers divorce cases that were really very comic.

When a will has to be administered, matters often become very mixed up, as you may easily imagine. Who are the legitimate children? which are the b.a.s.t.a.r.ds?

Of course all these confusions make work for the men of law, who naturally think American legislation the finest in the world.

The city of Chicago alone possesses seventeen hundred and sixty-eight lawyers, all thriving.

What a capital subject for an opera-bouffe might be got from some of those Chicago divorce cases! What merry _quid pro quos_! What amusing scenes! Choruses of lawyers; choruses of lawful wives, with the refrain:

"We are Mrs. Jonathan, tra la!"

The facility of marriage and divorce is comic, but it has its tragic side too.

There exist scoundrels, in America, who make a speculation of marriage.

One constantly hears of some poor girl having been persuaded into marrying an individual, who deserted her a few days after the ceremony.

Her trinkets and little savings go with the absconding husband, needless to say.

Why seduce? says the scamp; it is much easier to marry the girl.

The forsaken one may console herself with the reflection that all is lost save honour.

It is certainly a consolation.

While I was in Michigan, the Detroit detectives were in search of a man who was claimed by seventeen wives, all _lawful_, robbed, and abandoned.

I extract from a Chicago paper the following evidence, full of originality and humour. The plaintiff is at the bar, being examined:

"What is your husband's occupation?" asked counsel.